Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/09/19 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular • MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA September 19, 1988 1 . Call to order Mayor Hanks called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 2. Roll call The following Council members were present at roll call : Bruce Battaglia David Strand Thomas Duffy Lyle Hanks Allen Friedman Also present were the Acting City Manager, City Attorney, Director of Planning, Director of Public Works and the City Assessor. 3. Presentations Mayor Hanks read proclamations for Fire Prevention Week and Constitution Week. 4. Approval of minutes It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to approve the minutes of the September 6, 1988 meeting with the following correction: the title of item 8h. should be EDA, not EAW. The motion passed 4-0-1 (Councilmember Battaglia abstained) . 5. Approval of agenda It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, to approve the consent agenda for September 16, 1988. The motion passed 5-0. It was moved by Councilmember Battaglia, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to approve the agenda for September 19, 1988. The motion passed 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6a. Assessment, Project 87-48 There being no one wishing to speak, Resolution 88-124 the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Friedman, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-124 entitled "Resolution adopting assessment for improvement No. 87-48, mid-block street lighting." 4111 The motion passed 5-0. 6b. Assessment, Project 87-56 Maureen Dougherty, 4620 Vallacher. She Resolution 88-125 asked for clarification of the assessment and her neighbors had not understood that only those signing the petition would pay the cost. They thought every -178- City Council minutes Sept. 19, 1988 one would share / equitably in the cost of the light. She said that during the process of installing the wiring, mature elm trees and young maple trees were severely damaged. If they had known this was going to take place, she said they would have come back to the City to ask that the project be stopped. Councilmember Strand said that the City' s policy on assessment of mid -block street lights was 100% assessed to signers of a petition. He said invariably the person who does not want the light is the person sitting right in back of the light. He said there was a concern if the person who has the light shining in his home all night long and does not want the light should rightfully be assessed. He asked Mrs. Dougherty, based on his comments, what her thoughts were. She said she would be extremely cautious about signing a petition in the future unless she had complete information about how a project was to be carried out. It was her understanding that at the public hearing there was an opportunity for anyone who did not want the light to have their say. She and her neighbors were under the impression everyone was in agreement on the light. Councilmember Strand suggested the wording of the petition could be changed stating the assessment would be apportioned among those signing the petition. Mayor Hanks said he would have no opposition to a reduction in the assessment under the circumstances as voiced by Ms. Dougherty. The City Assessor said his interpretation of the policy on mid-block street lighting is to send notices of the improvement hearing and assessment hearing to the signers of the petition. Thus, those residents not signing the petition did not receive notice of either hearing. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to reopen it at any future time. Councilmember Duffy agreed with Councilmember Strand that the language on the petition should be revised giving an approximate dollar amount for an improvement and an approximation of what each petitioner could expect to be assessed. It was moved by Councilmember Duffy, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to reduce the assessment to the 18 parcels to $120 each, and to waive reading and adopt reso- lution 88-125 entitled "Resolution adopting assessment for improvement No. 87-56, mid-block street lighting." The motion passed 5-0. F 6c. Street lighting Assessment hearing, Project 87-40 Resolution 88-126 There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-126 entitled "Resolution adopting assessment for improvement No. 87-40, Park Center Blvd. street lighting." The motion passed 5-0. -179- • City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 6d. Sanitary sewer4111 Assessment hearing, Project 85-05 Resolution 88-127 There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Battaglia, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-127 entitled, "Resolution adopting assessment for improvement No. 85-05, sanitary sewer." The motion passed 5-0. 6e. Assessment hearing Project 84-90A, watermain and sanitary sewer extension There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to reopen and continue it at any future time. It was moved by Councilmember Duffy, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-128 entitled, "Resolution adopting assessment improvement No. 84-90A, watermain and sanitary sewer extension." The motion passed 5-0. 4111 6f. Transmitter/storage yard Tim Keane, attorney representing the applicant, Minnesota Cellular Telephone, said that Brian Gunnerson, Director of Engineering for McCaw Communications and David Kuhn, contractor and design engineer with Andrew Systems. were present. Mr. Keane said the matter had been before the Planning Commission on May 18, 1988 and the commission recommended unanimous approval of the special permit subject to several conditions including cleanup of the site, landscaping and restriction of substantial exterior storage. He said the matter came before the City Council on June 20, 1988 and concerns were voiced by a neighbor. Council recommended staff hold a neighborhood meeting which was done on July 11 at City Hall . He believed the neighborhood concerns were addressed at that July 11 meeting. The matter returned to City Council on July 18 with recommendation for approval , but was continued subject to additional information on the design/engineering aspects of the tower being submitted to Council . The applicant requested continua- tion to September 19, 1988. He said the applicant had submitted detailed engineering plans to staff as well as bringing in Mr. Kuhn from Andrews Systems who was available to answer questions re details of the engineering and safety factors. Mayor Hanks recollected the Planning Commission had specified a 10 ft. high fence. Mr. Keane concurred that that was a condition of approval . Councilmember Friedman asked- how many residents turned out for the July 11 meeting and how the neighborhood was notified. 41/1 Mr. Keane responded it was his understanding the neighborhood given notice was defined by 26th St. on the south, Hampshire on the west, Cedar Lake Rd. on the north and through the eastern boundary to the wetlands. He said he exceeded the 350 ft. notice requirement. He recollected 6-7 individuals from the residential and business community were in attendance. He said they received mailed notice from the Planning department. -180- City Council meeting September 19, 1988 The Planning Director said the letter to the residents was dated June 24, 1988. Councilmember Battaglia said his concerns were basically with safety and esthetics. He asked if the tower were to fall down, what kind of danger would the neighborhood be in. Mr. Kuhn , engineer with Andrews Corp. said that the tower will not fall except under what would be termed extreme conditions such as tornados. Relative to fall radius, this is not a problem with this type of tower. Any structural failure should it occur would be such that the top portion would buckle over onto the lower portion of the tower and not reach the ground. In response to a question from Councilmember Battaglia, Mr. Kuhn said they had constructed 300-400 of this similar design. Andrews has constructed in the range of 1500 self-supporting towers. He said he was aware of two self-supporting towers which had problems: one buckled over on itself due to extreme winds; the other was pulled into the path of a passing tornado, but did not collapse. Councilmember Battaglia asked what kind of sight lines the neighborhood had of the tower and what was its impact on the esthetics of the neighborhood. The Planning Director said that the houses on Eliot View would be some 10-20 ft. higher than the elevation of W. 23rd St. so they would clearly be able to see the tower. He said it would be painted a neutral color so that it will blend into the extent possible with the atmosphere and sky. He said its visibility to residents on Cedar Lake Rd. would depend upon locations of obstructions such as a house, tall trees, etc. Councilmember Strand asked the City Planner if there was any documentation on what happends to property values when there is a tower of any type placed in a neighborhood. The City Planner said he had no specific documentation, but he felt that anyone would admit that the closer a property is to a tower, the greater adverse impact it is going to have on property values. Councilmember Strand asked the City Planner if, in his opinion, this particular tower was going to have a negative effect on the neigghborhood property values. The City Planner said it was difficult to judge that. He said the neighborhood now abuts an industrial district which may have had some economic impact in the past. He said if he were asked if construction of such a tower were to increase property values, he would have to say there is nothing about the tower that would increase values. In answer to a question from Councilmember Strand, Mr. Keane said the tower would not have a beacon. Councilmember Friedman asked what the maximum wind and ice factors have been in this area. The engineer was not able to provide that information. He did state that UBC recommends a 70-75 mph and UBC is a uniform building code recognized throughout the industry and does attempt to take into account local wind loads. Councilmember Friedman wanted to know how a figure of 80 mph was good for this area. The engineer said it was an accepted standard for this area. Mr. Keans said that the UBC had charts which were applicable to geographical areas and that the one -181- City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 4111 for Minnesota does show the need for a design load in excess of 70 mph under the ice loading condition and less than 80 mph. Tom Peterson, 2665 Eliot View Rd. , said his neighborhood was being whittled away bit by bit by lots of rules, powerful people and the power of money. He said he was against the tower as it was one more thing to trash up his neighborhood. He said satellite dishes and antennaes will be affixed to the tower with more planned for the future. Councilmember Friedman asked how many dishes/antennaes are going to be hung on the tower and has the wind shear factor been taken into consideration. Mr. Gunnerson said that six, small-panel antennas are planned as well as one microwave dish. He said that these elements had been figured into wind shear factors. He said to his knowledge the towers have never interfered with television or radio devices. Councilmember Battaglia asked how high a typical ham operator tower could go. The City Planner said there were a number in the City in the 30-40 ft. range. Mr. Kuhn said that last year the FCC passed a rule that amateur radio towers can be at any height in order to maintain the communications that they desire regardless of a city' s restrictions as long as they were in conformance with building construction codes. 4111 Councilmember Friedman said St. Louis Park had a test case before the Supreme Court on ham radio antennas and they were considered an accessory use of the property, completely different from commercial towers. He noted that under consider- ation was a special use permit as opposed to an accessory use or permitted use. Mark McHenry, Inglewood and Cedar Lake Rd. , asked what was occuping the property currently and what was the gain to St. Louis Park of such a tower. Mr. Keane said there was a small two-story office building on the property and open storage yard which is operating without a special permit. He said the benefit to St. Louis Park is that there are in excess of 350 cellular customers who are residents and doing business in the City - contractors working on job sites, real estate professionals, emergency services and practically every profession that is on the move utilizes such a system. Councilmember Friedman said that when he was a cellular customer, he had no trouble going all over the Twin Cities without this tower in St. Louis Park. He did not see it as a benefit to the community. The consultant to Minnesota Cellular Telephone said the reason for the tower in St. Louis Park was not to improve the existing service, but to add capacity to the system as in the fall of 1989, the antenna on top of the IDS is to be 41/1 discontinued. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Friedman, to -182- City Council meeting September 19, 1988 authorize preparation of a resolution of denial with findings. Councilmember Strand complimented Mr. Keane in his representation of his client. However, it was not Council 's function to judge whether there can be a commercial convenience or to make something convenient for a commercial entity. The Council 's role is to judge if this proposal does advance the general welfare of the City. He remained unconvinced that the general welfare of the City is being advanced; quite contrairily, he felt putting a 160-ft. structure in anyone's backyard affects the esthetics of the neighborhood and certainly reduces property values. The motion passed 5-0. 6g. Smith property Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Resolution 88-129 Mr. Schomburg, representing John Smith, noted the following sentence should be deleted from the resolution: "Use of Alternative Plan 4 is subject to the condition that the industrial use be achieved through the Planned Unit Development zoning process." The Director of Planning concurred. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it to a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-129 entitled "A resolution approving an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 1980 to the Year 2000 for the City of St. Louis Park under Minnesota Statutes 462.351 to 462.364: East side of Virginia Ave. between 28th St. and the Burling Northern Railroad." Councilmember Strand referred to the case study worked up for the Planning Commission, and the paragraph entitled "Brief History of RB Zoning." He asked if the description in the sentence beginning, "In 1966. . ." was correct. The Acting City Manager recollected that to be correct, that that small RB remnant was left over. i I Councilmember Battaglia thought just one zoning change was to be made instead of the three noted in the report before Council . The Director of Planning briefly explained what was proposed under the resolution. The City Attorney said he thought what Councilmember Battaglia was trying to do was make sure that the Comprehensive Plan amendment which is presently before Council is consistent with the zoning which will come later and that it was appropriate for the Planning Director to so explain. The Planning Director said that the if the zoning changes are approved as proposed, the zoning ordinance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Industrial park zoning would extend all the way to the tip to the area north of 27th St. The area immediately to the north is already designated as park lane on the recently-amended Comprehensive Plan. Therefore R-1 or low density zoning, would be consistent and the designated B-3 zoning is also consistent. The motion passed 5-0. -183- City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 4111 6h. Zoning change Smith property Mr. Schomburg said it would be his request that the area being changed from R- B to B-3 run to the south line of the abandoned Hutchingson line and then that narrow strip of RB would not be adjacent to the track. He said he would be discussing this with the Planning staff. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Duffy, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to waive first reading, set second reading for October 3 and authorize summary publication. The motion passed 5-0. 6i . 3244 Raleigh Ave. Request to vacate utility easement The Acting City Manager said the hearing should be continued as an accurate // legal description of the property was not yet in staff's hands. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, I 4111 to continue the hearing to October 3, 1988. The motion passed 5-0. 6j. Cityscape Special permit to construct a 156-unit Resolution 88-139 apartment building located at 5705 35th St. West Brian Weber, Can-American Realty, addressed Council relative to the conditions of the special permit. In condition 15, if the completion date could not be met, what recourse would he have. The Mayor responded that when a project is moving right along, should making the completion date become difficult, a request for an extension from the Council would suffice. In condition 11 , he asked that the words "be modified to" be struck. In condition 3, he asked that language be included relative to plans and concepts for what can go on the piece of land so buses are not dropping people off in front of the apartment, etc. Councilmember Friedman said he hoped Council would not run into the problem they did a year or so ago when tv satellite dishes were installed after completion of the project. The Director of Planning said since they were not shown on the plan they would not be permitted unless integrated into an attic space. 41/1 Mr. Weaver said the complex would be wired for cable. Councilmember Strand suggested condition 3 read: " . . .designated for future access by pedestrian traffic for transit purposes." -184- City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Battaglia, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 88-139 entitled "A resolution granting special permit under Section 14-124. 101 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit construction of a 156 unit apartment for property '� zoned PUD, planned unit development district located at 5705 35th St. W." as modi- field. The motion passed 5-0. 6k. 2925 Monterey Ave. Request to change land use designation Ron App, DH Grace Corp. , addressed Council to clarify that all they are asking for is a change in the designation. All else, landscaping, parking, etc. , would remain the same. Mayor Hanks asked if this request was being brought because they were not able to .rent the elderly housing. Mr. App said that housing is not expected to be constructed for at least 1-3 years. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Duffy to waive first reading and set second for Oct. 3. The motion died for lack of a second. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia to reject the request. In answer to a question from the Mayor, the Planning Director said that if the motion passed, it would remain as senior citizen housing for the eastern portion. The motion passed 4-1 (Councilmember Duffy opposed) . 61 . Preliminary plat: Monterey Park Ron App said he had been working with staff to clear up some confusion and misunderstandings with the previous architectural firm that was involved with the project. He said he and staff had worked closely to correct all the difficulties and problems that had been inherent. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia to approve the preliminary plat. The motion passed 5-0. -185- City Council minutes Sept. 19, 1988 4111 6m. Amendment to subdivision ordinance There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a later date. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, to waive first reading, set second reading for Oct. 3, 1988 and authorize summary publication. The motion passed 5-0. 6n. Special permit: Car wash 8650 Hwy. 7 Resolution 88-130 There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it to a later date. Councilmember Strand asked if Council approves the resolution, the use of blue glazed concrete blocks would be denied per the Planning Commission's recommendation. The Acting City Manager said that the Planning Commission's resolution states that the exterior materials of the building should comply with the architectural control ordinance and architectural policy for the Knollwood area. She said 4111 it had been determined that the proposed exterior materials would not be consistent with that ordinance and policy. Councilmember Strand asked what would be the percentage of brick required for the car wash to be in conformance. The Acting City Manager said that in the past when burnished block is being used, an effort is made to integrate it with other mateirals so that it does not have a massive appearance. She felt in this instance, it is something that would have to be discussed with the applicant. Councilmember Battaglia was concerned with the car wash being constructed so close to the creek and asked if any environmental study has been conducted. The City Planner said no impact statement had been prepared. He said there is a dedication of park land along the creek. Staff has studied such issues as drainage and runoff and these concerns discussed with the applicant. Councilmember Friedman was concerned about the number of vehicles already in the area, the number drawn to a car wash and the turning movements. The City Planner said that the Planning and Engineering staffs had studied this matter and they had discussed with the applicant certain modifications in their plan. Councilmember Friedman cited water/ice conditions common in car washes. 41/1 Larry Page, architect for the project, addressed Council . He displayed illustra- tions of what is proposed for the car wash. He said they have compromised their design to set the entrance further to the east, further from the bridge abutment. He said a snow melt system will be installed which will alleviate any freezing water problem as cars exit the car wash. He said they had studied -186- City Council meeting Sept. 1988 Knollwood area and they were intending to put up a top quality car wash, spending about twice what such facilities are being built for. He felt the II blue glazed concrete block characterized what happened to a car as it proceeds through the car wash process to emerge sparkling clean. They did not see a common architectural thread throughout the Knollwood district that would prevent their using the exterior material proposed. Dorothy Brannon, 8951 W. 36th St. , said when they brought their plans to the Planning Commission six years ago they were told there were architectural guidelines to be followed. They were told a block building would not be acceptable and that the exterior should conform with the rest of the buildings within the business district. She believed all buildings constructed within the past five years to conform relative to exterior materials. She said she would like to see a continuation of the exterior surfaces as now exist. Rod Brannon believed the applicant had other car washes which don't conform to the one being proposed. He was not sure there was a uniform corporate image such as the architect had testified to. Mr. Page, president of the company, in answer to Mr. Brannon's comments, said the other car washes were mostly 25 years old, purchased as existing operations. Only the new facilities are being identified by this new look. He asked for clarification on what it was the Council said relative to the Planning Commission report. The Acting City Manager reiterated her earlier statement that the City's architectural control policy should be reviewed vis a vis the proposed facility. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-130 entitled "Resolution granting special permit under Section 14-156(5) and 14. 124.100(2) of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to permit a car wash with gasoline sales for property zoned B-2, general business district, and F-2, floodplain district, located at 8650 Hwy. 7." Councilmember Strand said he could not approve the special permit if the applicant intended to put the blue glazed block on. Councilmember Duffy preferred the plain block to the blue glazed. He recommended the applicant work with the City's architectural control committee and arrive at some agreement as to a mix of brick and your block could work out well . Councilmember Friedman pointed out to the applicant that the Planning Commission was an advisory commission and they did recommend approval of the permit subject to staff's report. It was not a foregone conclusion that because the Planning Commission recommended approval of the special permit, it was acceptable to the Council . Mayor Hanks asked how condition c. relative to the applicant be in conformance with the City's architectural policies is enforced. He asked if that were be- tween staff and the applicant, with Council not seeing it again. 1110 The City Planner said that was the usual procedure. Mayor Hanks said he couldn't go along with that as he was in agreement with Councilmember Duffy. -187- _ City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 4111 The City Attorney said the applicant would seek a building permit at which time the Inspections department could approve or deny the permit based on consistency with the special permit. If they denied it based on the architectural control ordinance, they would have right of appeal to the Council . He felt the Acting City Manager' s invitation to the applicant to work with the architec- tural committee is an attempt to arrive at a mutually acceptable design. Mayor Hanks felt there was indeed a consistency throughout the City with . which the proposal does not remotely conform. He was not about to leave a decision about exterior materials up to staff with no further input from Council . He didn't buy the fact that the Planning Commission was impressed with the selection of material . Councilmember Duffy agreed \with the Mayor. He did feel confident staff and the developer would work out a compromise which would be acceptable to both. The motion passed 4-1 (Mayor Hanks opposed) . Councilmember Strand hoped that if the architectural control committee were in doubt about what Council wants, they would come back to Council before they give final approval to any building materials. 6o. 2400 Nevada Ave. Special permit for parking Resolution 88-131 lot 4111 There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Duffy, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-131 entitled "Resolution rescinding Resolution 5081 adopted July 1 , 1974 and granting special permit under Section 14-136 of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to allow the construction of a parking lot at 2400 Nevada Ave." The motion passed 5-0. 6p. Silverberg Additions Preliminary plat stated she lived Lynn Foster, 2221 Cedar St. ,/ on the edge of the Silverburg Addition . She said she represented 25 neighbors surrounding the property. The residents don't particularly oppose the setback on the property; however, one resident, a former owner of the property, was not allowed to build on the property due to the amount of concrete and railroad ties that were buried deep on the property. If the Silverburgs were granted a setback to build, a lot of trees will have to be removed and the natural environment disturbed. They may find they can't build on the property after all . They were asking the Council to research that matter in more detail . Daniel Kutoff, 2625 Raleigh Ave. , represented the group wanting to develop 41/1 the property. He said they had records of soil borings done in 1975 which showed the property was buildable. The setback was being required because of the steep slope at the rear of the property. Mayor Hanks read the petition into the record: The homeowners and neighbors on Inglewood/Cedar St./W. 28th St. area have expressed great concern as to the proposed Silverburg addition. The major concerns center around the -188- City Council meeting Sept. ' 19, 1988 preservation of the ecological environment as well as the increased density and noise pollution. We need reassurance the natural environment of mature trees, wildlife that exists now will not be disturbed in a significant way III since this is one of the few natural habitats remaining in the St. Louis Park area. We are concerned that the building does not eliminate the mature trees and surrounding wildlife, the foliage bordering Cedar St. , integral to preserving 'and health and peace and environment of the neighborhood. We urge the City Council to accept no change in variance especially those that would disturb the natural environment of the area. We request the City Council and the park system to assist the developer in examining the planning of the proposed addition and the citizens of the area should receive written assurance that the environmental balance and quality of the area will not be disturbed." Mark McHenry, corner of Inglewood and Cedar Lake Ave. He expressed his concerns about losing any of the greenery of the area and lose of a natural noise barrier between his property and 28th Ave. Councilmember Strand asked Mr. Kutoff how much of the natural vegetation can be preserved. Mr. Kutoff responded that only the new trees in the center of lot 1 will have to go. He wanted to put everyone at ease that anything being planned is very much in tune with homes already in the area. Milt Hallman, also on the corner of Inglewood and Cedar Lake Ave. , said what they were concerned about was the borings taken on the property. He said his wife remembered that there was an extremely deep ravine back ofII the property into which were dumped big concrete slabs, bituminous tar, etc. He felt that a house built on these materials would eventually cause a shift. He said there was a lot of excess concrete slabs and similar materials back beyond the wooded area. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to approve the preliminary plat with the 25-ft. setback. Mayor Hanks asked if the applicant was not requesting 10-ft. setbacks on all three lots. The Planning Director said he understood that was their intent. But he said tonight, it appeared they were asking for only one. Mr. Kutoff said that was now correct. Councilmember Strand assumed the developer and contractor would take the precautions necessary to determine if they have a site that is buildable. Councilmember Friedman said they could go ahead and build on two lots for sure and he expressed similar concerns to Councilmember Strand. He wondered if it was just the trees, vegetation and what was buried there that was of concern. Ms. Foster said any footings sunk to provide for construction would kill the trees. She said this was a nature sanctuary with many small animals and a rare pilliated woodpecker. She said she had kept her property wild for just those reasons. -189- City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 4111 Councilmember Battaglia asked if a 10-ft. variance was required in order to build on the lot. The Planning Director said by moving the house forward or backward a bit, a variance would not be required. Also, previously a proposal to construct a house was submitted without a variance request. Councilmember Battaglia asked why it was being requested now. Mr. Kutoff said it was the engineer's opinion that the way to preserve most of the area in the back was to have a 25-ft. setback rather than go another 10 ft. into the wooded area. The motion passed 4-1 (Councilmember Battaglia opposed) . 6q. Variance: 4301 Cedarwood Burt Sharp, applicant, said the Resolution 88-132 variance request had been discussed with their nearest neighbors on all sides, none of whom had any objection. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council tolthereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Friedman, seconded by Councilmember Friedman, 4111 seconded by Councilmember Strand, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-132 entitled "A resolution granting variance in rear yard setback from Section 14-128(5) of the ordinance code relating to zoning to permit construction of a house addition having a rear yard setback of 25.5 feet instead of the required 35 feet in the R-1 , single family residence district, at 4301 Cedarwood Rd." The motion passed 5-0. 6r. Parkwoods First Addition Paul Brewer, 4601 Excelsior Blvd. , owner of the apartment building in the Parkwoods First Addition, asked Council to approve the recommended preliminary plat. Doris Redke, 5501 W. 25i St. asked if there were a public hearing prior to tonight. The Acting City Manager said it was considered at the Planning Commission and thereafter notices sent out to residents within 350 ft. of tonight' s hearing. The Planning Director displayed a transparency to illustrate what is being proposed. Councilmember Strand asked what area had been notified. The Planning Director 41/1 had a printout of addresses notified and that the notice was mailed shortely after Aug. 29. Councilmember Strand asked if the public hearing were continued to Oct. 3 and a larger area notified, would that cause a problem. Mr. Brewer said they would really like to move along with this project and that they would have to appear before both the Planning Commission and City Council yet r • City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 once again for final plat approval . Ilt Councilmember Battaglia asked if the preliminary and final plat could be approved at the same time. The City Attorney responded yes as long as all engineering preliminaries were in order. He said it appeared action could not be taken on the preliminary and final at the next meeting as final action has not been completed on Comprehensive Plan amendments. Mayor Hanks urged to approve the preliminary plat as it answers a request that Council has heard before from the neighborhood relative to development in their area. It was moved by Councilmember Battaglia seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to approve the preliminary plat and hold a neighborhood meeting. The motion passed 5-0. 6s. Vacation: W. 38th St. Alfred Rossi said that the Planning Commission had denied this request stating it would prohibit future access to the park on 38th St. He said there already was access entering the park six feet away from where 38th St. would access the park. He said he was requesting vacation because his lot was a triangular, illegal lot and he can't construct an addition or garage on it. Councilmember Strand asked what would the problems be created by a partial II vacation. The Acting City Manager noted the report stated access was needed for Wolfe Park. Also that there is a worn pathway which might be a potential trail at some point and therefore a need to maintain right-of-way in the area. Councilmember Strand said that would satisfy a full vacation. He felt a different configuration would maintain access to the park but also provide some space for Mr. Rossi to do some building on his property. The Planning Director said if the intent were to vacate only one-half of the right-of-way a situation can be created where it appears it could become an issue with respect to how to you service that, provide maintenance, what is the intent. Ordinarily partial vacations of this type, narrowing a roadway down, are not desirable. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, to deny the vacation. Councilmember Strand did not want to see the entire vacation, but did not want to foreclose some creative planning. He would be willing to look at a more acceptable proposal including Council dealing with the lot in some fashion. Mayor Hanks noted there was a fee involved in vacation and if Councilmember -191- City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 4111 Strand was asking him to look at alternatives, perhaps the public hearing should be continued so he can work under the same fee. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia to continue the public hearing to Oct. 17. The motion passed 5-0. 6t. American Legion Special permit Resolution 88-133 Tom Schottenbauer, American Legion, addressed the Council . All was acceptable in the resolution except condition c. relative to poured in concrete curbing. In answer to a question from the Mayor, he said the grading was quite flat and was designed to have drainage run off onto the boulevard area rather than being trapped in the parking lot which a curb would do. Arthur Kane, 4033 Xenwood Ave. , spoke. He addressed the posted signs for permit parking. The neighborhood has had some problem with people ignoring the permit parking signs. They wondered what they should do. The Acting City Manager said she expected enforcement to begin that next week. She said the American Legion has been working on locating other parking 4111 spaces for its customers and to work within the permit parking program. She said it was a bit early to have everyone educated to the program. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Duffy, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-133 entitled "A resolution granting special permit under Section of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to permit the development of a parking lot for property zoned B-2 general business district and R-2 single family district located at 5707 Excelsior Blvd." The motion passed 5-0. Councilmember Duffy said all had come a long way, but there was still a ways to go to completely solve the parking problem at the Legion. He felt the Legion was as cooperative as its finances allowed them to be. He felt the permit parking was going to make a significant difference as well as removal of the Zabel house opening up yet more parking. , The motion passed 5-0. 6u. Establishment of EDA 41/1 Resolution 88-134, 88-135 It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Friedman, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-134 entitled "Enabling resolution establishing an economic development authority for the City of St. Louis Park." The motion passed 5-0. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Friedman, -192- City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 seconded by Councilmember Friedman, to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 88-135 entitled "Resolution reorganizing the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of St. Louis Park, MN." Ilt The motion passed 5-0. PETITIONS, REQUESTS, COMMUNICATIONS None. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 8a. Utility easement: Second reading of ordinance re Ordinance 1760-88 vacation of storm sewer and drain tile easement across 2847 Princeton and 2848 Ottawa Ave. It was moved by Councilmember Friedman, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to waive reading and adopt Ordinance 1760-88 entitled "An ordinance vacating public storm sewer and drain tile easements over 2847 Princeton Ave. So. and part of 2848 Ottawa Ave. So." The motion passed 5-0. 8b. 2633 Alabama Ave. Second reading of ordinance releasing Ordinance No. 1762-88 title interests in property known as 2633 Alabama Ave. 11/1 It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, to waive reading and adopt Ordinance 1762-88 entitled "An ordinance releasing title interests in property known as 2633 Alabama Ave. , St. Louis Park, MN." The motion passed 5-0. 8c. Issuance of citations Second reading of ordinance re Ordinance 1761-88 to certain city employees issuing citations It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1761-88 entitled "An ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Municipal Code, Part 5, "Ordinance Violations Bureau" renaming it "Authorization to issue tickets," repealing Sections 1-501 , 1-502, 1-503, 1-505, 1-506 and 1-507; amending Section 1-504." The motion passed 5-0. 8d. EDA Second reading of establishment ordinance No. 1763-88 of Economic Development Authority It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, 1110 to waive reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1763-88 entitled "An ordinance relating to the division of economic development, housing and redevelopment powers between the economic Development Authority and the Housing Authority." The motion passed 5-0. -193- Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 8e. Cable TV franchise4111 Extension of cable tv franchise Resolution 88-136 It was moved by Councilmember Battaglia, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-136 entitled "A Resolution pursuant to the Cable Communications Franchise of the City of St. Louis Park extending the termination date of existing franchise." The motion passed 5-0. 8f. Sale of property 6326 Oxford, 6333 W. 37th Resolution 88-137 It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-137 entitled "Resolution authorizing purchase of property to replat area bound by W. 37th St. , Dakota Ave. So. and Oxford Ave." ` The motion passed 5-0. 8g. 49er settlement Resolution 88-138 It was moved by Councilmember Battaglia, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 88-138 entitled "Resolution establishing 4111 Public Works employees' salaries and insurance contributions for the years ending Dec. 31 , 1988 and Dec. 31 , 1989." The motion passed 5-0. REPORTS FROM OFFICERS, BOARDS, COMMITTEES 9a. Storm sewer: 2847 Princeton Relining of existing storm sewer It was moved by Councilmember Friedman, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to approve the proposed change in Project 88-16 from reconstruction and relocation to relining the pipe in its existing location and authorize execution of a contract with Insituform in amount of $14,900. The motion passed 5-0. 9b. I-394 task force It was moved by Councilmember Duffy, seconded by Councilmember Strand, to receive the report for filing. The motion passed 5-0. 9c. Ottawa Ave. traffic study By consent, motion to authorize staff :: o hold neighborhood meeting 9d. Board of Zoning Appeals minutes Aug. 25 1/ 9e. August financial report -194- City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 9f. Charter Commission minutes Sept. 7 9g. Cable TV minutes Aug. 25 1111 9h. HRA minutes Aug. 2 Items 9d through 9h ordered filed by consent. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10a. Boards and Commissions Mayor Hanks appointed Tom Gale to the Police Civil Service Commission. It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Duffy, to appoint Tom Gale to the Police Civil Service Commission. The motion passed 5-0. 10b. Capital equipment notes It was moved by Councilmember Strand, seconded by Councilmember Friedman, not to proceed with the issuance of capital equipment notes. The motion passed 5-0. NEW BUSINESS lla. Bid tab: Alley paving, random curb/gutter, sidewalk and trails By consent, motion to designate Shafer Contracting Co as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract not to exceed $66,601 .85. llb. Bid tabulation Sand/salt storage facility By consent, motion to reject all bids and direct that the project documents be amended as necessary to provide for increased competitiveness in the bidding process. llc. Bid tabulation Sanitary sewer reconstruction and pond construction By consent, motion to designate J. P. Norex as lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract not to exceed $122,190.74. lld. Barr Engineering Amendment to contract It was moved by Councilmember Duffy, seconded by Councilmember Battaglia, to approve the construction and authorize execution of an amendment to Contract 1826 with Barr Engineering in the amount "of $60,000 to- provide for the design and construction inspection of a submerger outlet in Lake Calhoun to accept groundwater pumped from well No. 4. The motion passed 4-0. - -195- c I City Council meeting Sept. 19, 1988 II MISCELLANEOUS 12a. Claims Teresa Johnson - Greg Wetzel By consent, claims referred to City Clerk and City Manager. 12b. Communications from Mayor Mayor Hanks said a budget review session would be held Sept. 26 at 5:00 p.m. A meeting with Golden Valley City Council on the I-394 moratorium was scheduled for Tuesday, Sept. 27 at 7:30 in the Golden Valley City Council chambers. Mayor Hanks felt Council should soon be addressing its legislative program for 1989. 12c. Communications from Acting City Manager None. CLAIMS, APPROPRIATIONS, CONTRACT PAYMENTS 13a. Verified claims By consent, the list of verified claims prepared by the Director of Finance, dated Sept. 19, 1988 in the amount 4111 of $209,663.91 for vendor claims and $22,905.86 for payroll claims be approved and the Acting City Manager and City Treasurer be authorized to issue checks in the appropriate amounts. 14. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 11 :00 p.m. Ai-ti444 May,,, Ru- )qy\/tg1 R cording Secretary 41/1 -196-